Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #373027

Re: owl - please test

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/27/16, 12:10 PM, in article ahjdgu00b3.auo@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:

> Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>> On 2016-09-27, Octavian W. Lagrange <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> 
>>>> While the longer signature line is more secure, really a very short one
>>>> would accomplish the point of making it very hard for anyone to forge a
>>>> post
>>>> AND would not clutter your posts as much. When many Usenet posts are short
>>>> having such a long "security block" makes little sense.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Moron.  You could have just noted that you don't have a clue how
>>> any of this works, and left it at that.
>>> 
>> It's a thread in COLA. Is there a single thread that the clown snit
>> doesn't contaminate?
>> 
>> Oh yes, there is one.
>> The one where that person keeps posting open jobs.
>> Snit would never post in that thread because it involves WORK. Something
>> Michael Glasser has an aversion to.
>> 
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/H3torBM.gifv
> 
> 
<https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

owl - please test Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 22:25 +0000
  Re: owl - please test "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 22:31 +0000
    Re: owl - please test Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 22:44 +0000
      Re: owl - please test Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 15:47 -0700
      Re: owl - please test "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-25 23:06 +0000
        Re: owl - please test Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 23:17 +0000
    Re: owl - please test Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 15:45 -0700
      Re: owl - please test Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 22:47 +0000
    Why are you responding to a question addressed to owl? John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 09:43 -0700
      Re: Why are you responding to a question addressed to owl? "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-28 18:02 +0000
      Re: Why are you responding to a question addressed to owl? Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-09-28 19:46 -0400
        Why are you responding to a question addressed to owl? John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 17:14 -0700
  Re: owl - please test "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 18:57 +0000
    Re: owl - please test Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-27 19:02 +0000
      Re: owl - please test "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 19:10 +0000
        Re: owl - please test Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 12:32 -0700
        Re: owl - please test Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 12:46 -0700
      Re: owl - please test Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 12:33 -0700
    Re: owl - please test Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 12:01 -0700

csiph-web